Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Recreation Center Design topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents press board over new recreation center design and outreach; officials defend site and features

Town Board of the Town of Newburgh · April 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At public comment, residents raised concerns about the size, appearance and outreach around the new recreation center; board members and staff said environmental studies were done, the building is all‑electric, windows were sited for court lighting, and additional parking and landscaping are planned.

Several residents questioned the scale, design and public outreach for the Town of Newburgh’s new recreation center during public comment at the April 14 meeting.

Mary Lou Carolan said she could not find the minutes online from the previous meeting and pressed the board for details about community input and site selection. She asked whether other locations were considered and criticized the building’s appearance: “The building is huge and it does look like a warehouse and there are no windows,” she said.

Deputy Supervisor Scott M. Manley replied that community input sessions were held as part of public town board meetings and noted a prior public referendum that rejected a different site. Councilman Paul Ruggiero and Commissioner of Parks and Recreation James Presutti both said landscaping and additional parking are planned; Ruggiero added that offices at ground level have windows and that the higher windows were placed "for the basketball court lighting." Town Engineer Patrick J. Hines said the building is "100% electric" after checking with Central Hudson, and that other heating options such as propane were inefficient for that building size.

No formal action was taken during public comment. The exchange followed engineering and planning updates earlier in the agenda and reflects continuing public interest in the project’s design and parking impacts.